Solidarity and Self-Reliance

Finally Crawford admits that even when we are self-reliant we are not autonomous. We depend on others for approval and discernment to provide a standard. We can excel above that standard, but we are not defining what is excellent. This is humbling when so often I think we believe that if we just go off and work on our own we will end up doing something new that makes us stand out as an individual, but that can only happen when we have a standard to work up against. Others have to have gone before us to make our work worth something in this world. We can not be completely self-reliant and that is an important lesson to learn.

Work, Leisure, and Full Engagement

It does seem it is a human desire to find a work that allows for "rational activity, in association with other." Crawford makes a good arguement for why most jobs don't seem to offer this anymore that being that we have become far removed from what we are producing and can't gain the satisfaction from a job well done. This makes sense to me. The most satisfying and fully engaging jobs have been the ones where I have made something or helped someone and seen the results.

We shouldn't have to live for the weekend. We work most of our life. Our life shouldn't be only two weeks a year when we get a vacation. Life should be happening as we work and are engaged in what we are doing. This means I have to find something I love to work at...hmmm.

Thinking as Doing

There is a big difference between knowing and being able to do something. I think I often fall into the category of people of learn/read about a lot of things but can't do anything well. When life hits us it is harder to problem solve because we don't have the experience at doing anything enough that we can problem solve on the spot. That takes practice and action. Someone like Crawford or his mechanic friends weren't able to learn how to fix a motorcycle by reading the manuel and following the rules. They had to have experience with weather, different conditions, and differently aged bikes to know how to fix an individual problem.This is something that makes the human brain unique. It is able to break the rules and learn/memorize amazing amounts of things from experience.The new "social technology" idea is actually a scary one. It seems to threaten the use of the brain and what it means to be human. When problems are fixed through artificle intelligence the meaning behind things is lost and the action is thoughtless. A computer might be able to fix something quickly, but what does that mean for humanity? Are we to be inferior to the technology we created? Are we trying to play God?

The Contradictions of the Cubicle

Yet another chapter in "Shop Class as Soulcraft" has me nodding my head in agreement, but I feel helpless in the changing the prevading system of work in our culture! I feels like his critque is too little too late. It's my last year of college; an education that encouraged mindless teamwork, reading to get through the text, and talking in circles. I have often felt as Crawford did in his InfoTrac job. He was filling a quota and not actually able to think about the articles he had to read. That's often how college feels. You are here to get through the work, to get a job, and who knows if you are actually able to do anything by the end? The object is to play the game right. You have to say the right things, act as a team member instead of a crew member, and then maybe you will survive.

I don't think you have to fall into this common trap. My education has not been focused on the job at the end, but what I want to learn now. I love history, and many other topics, and did not minor in anything because I just wanted to take a variety of classes in topics I actually wanted to learn about. Most of the time it was a good experience, but I did have to jump through some hoops and now I am at the point where I have to think about a job and I'm wondering if this culture will allow someone like me to enter it. I went to school to learn and to learn how to think!

The Further Education of a Gearhead

Why are humans so prone to do things to an extreme? Crawford wrote about his obsession with finding answers for broken motorcycles, all stemming from his attentiveness, a good thing. Attentiveness, just like anything else, can lead back to selfishness/obsession. How are we supposed to counter-act the tunnel vision of a curious man who only sees his own goals? Crawford seems to say that the answer is a community (economic or otherwise) to keep the curious/attentive individual balanced. Funny how well this book ties into the class...

The Education of a Gearhead

I love the experience of sitting in a classroom staring at/sketching a once familiar object. The whole is no longer important and you have to be attentive to every detail. It requirers one to sort of start from scratch and forget all one's preconceived notions. Crawford speaks of the thoughtfulness that comes from crafting motorcycle parts (and drawing skeletons). When his mentor, Chas, was attentive and took his craft personally it allowed for the truth be revealed. He makes intelligent and unselfish decisions and in so doing becomes a more intellectually and morally virtuous person. He had to get outside his own head and try to fix something that was real. He was not creating it, but instead just looking at it afresh to give it new life. Crawford believes that in doing this one counters the culture of narcissism and wastefulness.  It makes sense. When one is attentive to something other than him/herself they can no longer dwell on their selfish concerns. This seems almost Biblical.

This chapter was packed with insightful thoughts. I'm still sorting through all them. I'll get back to this...

To Be a Master of One's Own Stuff

Matthew Crawford's chapter on mastering one's own stuff has led to some answers to my own nameless discontent. I think I have been stuck in the "bored housewife syndrome" that Betty Friedan theorizes is the problem modern women face in her historical book, The Feminine Mystique. Okay, so I am not a housewife, but I can still relate to the women of the 50's and 60's who Friedan was addressing. I too have experienced purposelessness in my life and I think it partly has to do with the fact that I have become a consumer instead of a producer. Our culture teaches us that we gain self-realization and freedom when we buy something new, instead of conserving something old, but we end up being acted upon and not involved in human engagement. We loose ourselves when we are not involved in a true "skilled and active human engagement". I think it is telling that companies like Betty Crocker have picked up on this fact and made their cake mixes with missing ingredients so that the consumer gets to "do" something and feel like they are producing a cake on their own. The "choices" hide the fact that the consumer is not expressing themselves or being creative and since we have been convinced we are doing something for so long that we have forgotten what it was to really be creative.


I have been passive to often, allowing for apathy, purposelessness, and boredom. I think it is something many people of my generation face. We are taught to try to find the most efficient way to get something done or get rich fast, but that in the end that doesn't usually lead to happiness or even contentment. Of course we want the next thing. Passivity has led to discontent because we are so used to being entertained or taken care of by someone or something else so that we can't even entertain or do something on our own anymore. Ironically the excuse is usually that one doesn't have enough time.